Reports - Inspection / Evaluation

We found that controls existed to ensure Ohio did not use SNAP administrative funds for participant benefits; however, our analytics of FY 2024 participant data identified 17,000 out of 917,000 households had anomalous data, representing $13.3 million in questioned costs.

We determined that the Rural Housing Service did not consistently perform timely servicing of multi-family housing projects we reviewed in the Midwest Region, which is essential to ensure that borrowers provided rental residents with safe and sanitary housing.

We determined that USDA has not fully implemented cybersecurity and governance controls within Artificial Intelligence systems in compliance with federal standards, leaving the agency at risk of data breaches or reputational harm.

We determined that the Forest Service did not fully comply with Federal laws and regulations when executing the pre-award contracting process for the sampled contracts from November 15, 2021, to March 31, 2025, resulting in more than $48.2 million in unsupported costs.

We determined that USDA’s IT security directives are not sufficiently relevant and effective to address recent threats, as they are not consistently updated and some are similar in content or function, resulting in potential risks to USDA’s IT security posture.

We determined that the Client Experience Center did not have adequate control activities over USDA client agencies’ computer equipment billing, which resulted in more than $83.3 million in unsupported costs.

The Office of Inspector General performed an inspection of four mission areas within the U.S.Department of Agriculture (USDA) to determine if the USDA and its mission areas are effectively identifying and mitigating security vulnerabilities on their publicly accessible web applications and websites.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) initiated an engagement across select USDA facilities to determine how much USDA space was being used by employees and contractors reporting to work in-person.

We determined that the Forest Service did not provide financial assistance to facilities that purchase and process ecosystem restoration byproducts in accordance with IIJA requirements, resulting in $86 million in questioned costs and $94 million in unsupported costs.

We determined that the Forest Service did not establish clear performance goals or outcomes for IIJA funds to support workforce development and training and commingled IIJA funds with other funds, resulting in more than $4.6 million in questioned costs.